AND · 18usc1343:interstate
The charged transmission must satisfy the jurisdictional requirement. Identify evidence of interstate routing, not simply the presence of a computer or telephone.
Exact element source
in interstate or foreign commerceSource:
docroot/ir/usc/title18.jsonl#title18_sec1343; Unicode character offsets [324:357] (end exclusive); SHA-256 944569d18f6d3624ae87dde151ee823f6cf078faa69c6d3e59fb832bc1aaa933.Routes and case patterns
| Route | Definition | Merits instance blocks | Distinct merits cases | Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified route provisional; 6 observed cases | no definition yet | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 6 | 0 | Used only in non-merits blocks (6). Excluded context examples:United States v. Jefferson — 562 F. Supp. 2d 719 (2008) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia · 2008 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted United States v. Sancho — 957 F. Supp. 39 (1997) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 1997 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted New England Data Services, Inc. v. Becher — 829 F.2d 286 (1987) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted |
| _whole accepted; provisional (1 case) | The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. | 1 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 0 | 1 | United States v. Boliaux — 915 F.3d 493 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Jefferson — 562 F. Supp. 2d 719 (2008) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia · 2008 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Sancho — 957 F. Supp. 39 (1997) · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · 1997 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| New England Data Services, Inc. v. Becher — 829 F.2d 286 (1987) · United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts background / meritsThe court infers only that interstate communication was probable (one defendant incorporated in another state); left to discovery on remand. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Hasson — 333 F.3d 1264 (2003) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsMichigan-to-Florida bank transfers; the interstate character of the charged wires was not contested (the fact sits in the `wire` block). | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Brumley — 59 F.3d 517 (1995) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsThat the agents' calls to the Missouri computer actually crossed state lines is recited as the only interstate communication in the record and was not disputed; what failed was the defendant's foreseeability of that interstate leg, recorded under `wire`. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Boliaux — 915 F.3d 493 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (18usc1343: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Interstate or foreign transmission | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; party: Edward Boliaux; count: four counts of wire fraud (used-car dealership floorplan-financing scheme); subject: party=Edward Boliaux; count=four counts of wire fraud (used-car dealership floorplan-financing scheme) Recited in the adopted Rule 29 order; the opinion does not indicate that interstate routing was contested on appeal, and there is no separate deciding sentence. | payments from an Illinois dealership routed through Pennsylvania or Ohio | The charged wire transmissions traveled across state lines-from Joliet Motors in Illinois and routed through Pennsylvania or OhioSource: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_915.jsonl#/f3d/915/0493-01; Unicode character offsets [3650:3779] (end exclusive); SHA-256 a2d8cc2afe88a91fa856e6f1d0d7fefd9cfc2de1338b80b4342b6d9644d0e078. |
| United States v. Baker — 923 F.3d 390 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2019 — not reached (18usc1343: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Interstate or foreign transmission | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsOnly glimpse: a footnote quoting the case agent that the Count 5 email between two people in Texas was routed through company servers in California; not an issue on appeal. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
Court interpretations
interpretation
The charged wire transmissions traveled across state lines-from Joliet Motors in Illinois and routed through Pennsylvania or Ohio, and they advanced the scheme to defraud the lenders because they were payments for a vehicle that had been sold to the detriment of the lender's interests.
United States v. Boliaux — 915 F.3d 493 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 (18usc1343: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))
The charged wire transmissions traveled across state lines-from Joliet Motors in Illinois and routed through Pennsylvania or Ohio, and they advanced the scheme to defraud the lenders because they were payments for a vehicle that had been sold to the detriment of the lender's interests.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_915.jsonl#/f3d/915/0493-01; Unicode character offsets [3650:3936] (end exclusive); SHA-256 a2d8cc2afe88a91fa856e6f1d0d7fefd9cfc2de1338b80b4342b6d9644d0e078.The charged transmission must satisfy the jurisdictional requirement. Identify evidence of interstate routing, not simply the presence of a computer or telephone.